+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 47
  1. #31
    All-Pro Morehead State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Westfield, MA
    Posts
    43,191

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    [quote user="RagTime Blue"][quote user="G-Men Surg."][quote user="GMENAGAIN"]





    http://cache.profootballweekly.com/2...nts-mock-draft




    Interesting, since all of the picks are made by the teams' beat writers . . . . . except that Paul Schwartz made the Giants pick (Fleener), whichprobably assures that we will not take Fleener. The guy is an idiot.




    [/quote] LOL![/quote]

    Whoever decided that beat writers should do a mock is absurd. Beat writers, by trade, aren't college scouts. . .they just supposedly know their team "needs".

    I like Schwartz, just don't trust his college scouting abilities.
    [/quote]




    Maybe so, but at least they have an idea of the team's needs. For a media operation, its not a bad way to go. They aren't going to get team personell to do it.

    "Phil Simms is the greatest QB in Giants history" ........Mahatma Gandhi

  2. #32

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    [quote user="Morehead State"]Bennett is extreemly athletic but there is no doubt that he has underperformed in the NFL.* But he can block and should be a huge assett in the running game.* Right now I'm more concerned with that aspect of our offense than any other.* One of the reasons in my view that Eli took so much punishment last season, including the playoffs was our lack of a running attack.* Just don't see how the addition of a pass catching rookie TE will help us in that.

    [/quote]

    The thing you're missing here is that Bennet won't freeze a Safety or LB because he isn't considered a receiving threat on play action / option plays.

    Bennet can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener can block but he's not an amazing blocker.

    Fleener also has the upside of being a very real threat in the passing game. If that pans out, that means one less person stuffing the box.

    One of the problems we had running the ball lately stems from not having a TE that can threaten down field (Ballard/Pascoe being mediocre at best and less than reliable down the stretch).

    Accordingly, our dynamic passing game relied on having a third stready outlet (be it MM as the #3 or our TE). We have effectively lost both due to free agency and injury for 2012.

    Fleener gives us the potential to partially solve our run-game, while at the same time gives us the highest probability of continuing our dynamic passing game as opposed to anyone else projected to be drafted at the #32 spot or that we currently have on our team.

    I'd call that a pretty big arguement for drafting him if he's available. More so than any other possible draftee. Hence the love affair.
    I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

  3. #33
    All-Pro Morehead State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Westfield, MA
    Posts
    43,191

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    [quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="Morehead State"]Bennett is extreemly athletic but there is no doubt that he has underperformed in the NFL. But he can block and should be a huge assett in the running game. Right now I'm more concerned with that aspect of our offense than any other. One of the reasons in my view that Eli took so much punishment last season, including the playoffs was our lack of a running attack. Just don't see how the addition of a pass catching rookie TE will help us in that.





    [/quote] The thing you're missing here is that Bennet won't freeze a Safety or LB because he isn't considered a receiving threat on play action / option plays. Bennet can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener also has the upside of being a very real threat in the passing game. If that pans out, that means one less person stuffing the box. One of the problems we had running the ball lately stems from not having a TE that can threaten down field (Ballard/Pascoe being mediocre at best and less than reliable down the stretch). Accordingly, our dynamic passing game relied on having a third stready outlet (be it MM as the #3 or our TE). We have effectively lost both due to free agency and injury for 2012. Fleener gives us the potential to partially solve our run-game, while at the same time gives us the highest probability of continuing our dynamic passing game as opposed to anyone else projected to be drafted at the #32 spot or that we currently have on our team. I'd call that a pretty big arguement for drafting him if he's available. More so than any other possible draftee. Hence the love affair.[/quote]




    First of all Fleener (or any other draftee at 32) is a college football player and a pro prospect. We don't know what he would do, or learn to do at the pro level.




    All you can do is draft the best prospects and coach them up. To put Fleener in as a starter in your projections this upcoming season is a huge leap. Rarely does a rookie TE contribute in the way you are suggesting.




    Maybe you're right about his potential contribution but there is a bit of rationalization in this argument. It assumes a lot and would represent "best case" scenario to me.




    Are there other TE's in the draft that could adddress the kinds of needs we have that can be taken in later rounds? Probably.




    I have a feeling that someone is dropping to us. Maybe Jonathon Martin, maybe the DE from USC, maybe Chandler Jones. I mean Prince dropped in our lap last draft and I think he's going to be a great pro.




    But I do think we are best served with a player that can help us in the running game.

    "Phil Simms is the greatest QB in Giants history" ........Mahatma Gandhi

  4. #34

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    [quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="Morehead State"]Bennett is extreemly athletic but there is no doubt that he has underperformed in the NFL.* But he can block and should be a huge assett in the running game.* Right now I'm more concerned with that aspect of our offense than any other.* One of the reasons in my view that Eli took so much punishment last season, including the playoffs was our lack of a running attack.* Just don't see how the addition of a pass catching rookie TE will help us in that.





    [/quote] The thing you're missing here is that Bennet won't freeze a Safety or LB because he isn't considered a receiving threat on play action / option plays. Bennet can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener also has the upside of being a very real threat in the passing game. If that pans out, that means one less person stuffing the box. One of the problems we had running the ball lately stems from not having a TE that can threaten down field (Ballard/Pascoe being mediocre at best and less than reliable down the stretch). Accordingly, our dynamic passing game relied on having a third stready outlet (be it MM as the #3 or our TE). We have effectively lost both due to free agency and injury for 2012. Fleener gives us the potential to partially solve our run-game, while at the same time gives us the highest probability of continuing our dynamic passing game as opposed to anyone else projected to be drafted at the #32 spot or that we currently have on our team. I'd call that a pretty big arguement for drafting him if he's available. More so than any other possible draftee. Hence the love affair.[/quote]




    First of all Fleener (or any other draftee at 32) is a college football player and a pro prospect.* We don't know what he would do, or learn to do at the pro level.




    All you can do is draft the best prospects and coach them up.* To put Fleener in as a starter in your projections this upcoming season is a huge leap.* Rarely does a rookie TE contribute in the way you are suggesting.**




    Maybe you're right about his potential contribution but there is a bit of rationalization in this argument.* It assumes a lot and would represent "best case" scenario to me.




    Are there other TE's in the draft that could adddress the kinds of needs we have that can be taken in later rounds?* Probably.




    I have a feeling that someone is dropping to us.* Maybe Jonathon Martin, maybe the DE from USC, maybe Chandler Jones.* I mean Prince dropped in our lap last draft and I think he's going to be a great pro.




    But I do think we are best served with a player that can help us in the running game.

    [/quote]

    Hence why I said "potential".

    If you consider the draft order a probability in potential (which is all that it really is) Fleener gives us the most potential upside THIS YEAR.

    That's not to say he would be the best player in the draft, our team or work out at all. Just that he POTENTIALLY plugs the greatest amount of holes/question marks on our team.

    All in one player.

    A great RB that can catch, block and run behind our inconsistent blocking would also do that for us, I agree.

    So in our debate here, it comes down to who gives us the greatest probability for doing so; the #1 rated TE in the draft, or the #2 (or #3 if we're going with Wilson) rated RB in the draft?

    I'd be fine with saying flip a coin. I don't think either has a measurable difference ... not enough to say definitively (as opposed to say the differences between Hightower and Kuechly lets say) and I'd be happy with either.

    If we DID go RB in the first, I think Martin (in the short term at least) gives us more upside then Wilson. Martin seemed to do better behind shoddy blocking then Wilson did; although Wilson is the more prototypical back (and possibly better compliment to AB).
    I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

  5. #35
    All-Pro Morehead State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Westfield, MA
    Posts
    43,191

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    [quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="Morehead State"]Bennett is extreemly athletic but there is no doubt that he has underperformed in the NFL. But he can block and should be a huge assett in the running game. Right now I'm more concerned with that aspect of our offense than any other. One of the reasons in my view that Eli took so much punishment last season, including the playoffs was our lack of a running attack. Just don't see how the addition of a pass catching rookie TE will help us in that.





    [/quote] The thing you're missing here is that Bennet won't freeze a Safety or LB because he isn't considered a receiving threat on play action / option plays. Bennet can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener also has the upside of being a very real threat in the passing game. If that pans out, that means one less person stuffing the box. One of the problems we had running the ball lately stems from not having a TE that can threaten down field (Ballard/Pascoe being mediocre at best and less than reliable down the stretch). Accordingly, our dynamic passing game relied on having a third stready outlet (be it MM as the #3 or our TE). We have effectively lost both due to free agency and injury for 2012. Fleener gives us the potential to partially solve our run-game, while at the same time gives us the highest probability of continuing our dynamic passing game as opposed to anyone else projected to be drafted at the #32 spot or that we currently have on our team. I'd call that a pretty big arguement for drafting him if he's available. More so than any other possible draftee. Hence the love affair.[/quote]




    First of all Fleener (or any other draftee at 32) is a college football player and a pro prospect. We don't know what he would do, or learn to do at the pro level.




    All you can do is draft the best prospects and coach them up. To put Fleener in as a starter in your projections this upcoming season is a huge leap. Rarely does a rookie TE contribute in the way you are suggesting.




    Maybe you're right about his potential contribution but there is a bit of rationalization in this argument. It assumes a lot and would represent "best case" scenario to me.




    Are there other TE's in the draft that could adddress the kinds of needs we have that can be taken in later rounds? Probably.




    I have a feeling that someone is dropping to us. Maybe Jonathon Martin, maybe the DE from USC, maybe Chandler Jones. I mean Prince dropped in our lap last draft and I think he's going to be a great pro.




    But I do think we are best served with a player that can help us in the running game.




    [/quote] Hence why I said "potential". If you consider the draft order a probability in potential (which is all that it really is) Fleener gives us the most potential upside THIS YEAR. That's not to say he would be the best player in the draft, our team or work out at all. Just that he POTENTIALLY plugs the greatest amount of holes/question marks on our team. All in one player. A great RB that can catch, block and run behind our inconsistent blocking would also do that for us, I agree. So in our debate here, it comes down to who gives us the greatest probability for doing so; the #1 rated TE in the draft, or the #2 (or #3 if we're going with Wilson) rated RB in the draft? I'd be fine with saying flip a coin. I don't think either has a measurable difference ... not enough to say definitively (as opposed to say the differences between Hightower and Kuechly lets say) and I'd be happy with either. If we DID go RB in the first, I think Martin (in the short term at least) gives us more upside then Wilson. Martin seemed to do better behind shoddy blocking then Wilson did; although Wilson is the more prototypical back (and possibly better compliment to AB).[/quote]




    Those Boise guys don't do much better than Uconn guys in the NFL.

    "Phil Simms is the greatest QB in Giants history" ........Mahatma Gandhi

  6. #36
    All-Pro Morehead State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Westfield, MA
    Posts
    43,191

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    We should PM when the 31st pick is made when we know who's on the board, and predict what we do.
    "Phil Simms is the greatest QB in Giants history" ........Mahatma Gandhi

  7. #37
    All-Pro slipknottin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    36,091

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    [quote user="Morehead State"]


    Those Boise guys don't do much better than Uconn guys in the NFL.

    [/quote]

    I really dont understand what scouts have seen in the former Uconn players drafted. Ive gone to most Uconn games and the first player Ive seen that to me looks like a legitimate NFL player is Reyes.

  8. #38

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    [quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="Morehead State"]Bennett is extreemly athletic but there is no doubt that he has underperformed in the NFL.* But he can block and should be a huge assett in the running game.* Right now I'm more concerned with that aspect of our offense than any other.* One of the reasons in my view that Eli took so much punishment last season, including the playoffs was our lack of a running attack.* Just don't see how the addition of a pass catching rookie TE will help us in that.





    [/quote] The thing you're missing here is that Bennet won't freeze a Safety or LB because he isn't considered a receiving threat on play action / option plays. Bennet can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener also has the upside of being a very real threat in the passing game. If that pans out, that means one less person stuffing the box. One of the problems we had running the ball lately stems from not having a TE that can threaten down field (Ballard/Pascoe being mediocre at best and less than reliable down the stretch). Accordingly, our dynamic passing game relied on having a third stready outlet (be it MM as the #3 or our TE). We have effectively lost both due to free agency and injury for 2012. Fleener gives us the potential to partially solve our run-game, while at the same time gives us the highest probability of continuing our dynamic passing game as opposed to anyone else projected to be drafted at the #32 spot or that we currently have on our team. I'd call that a pretty big arguement for drafting him if he's available. More so than any other possible draftee. Hence the love affair.[/quote]




    First of all Fleener (or any other draftee at 32) is a college football player and a pro prospect.* We don't know what he would do, or learn to do at the pro level.




    All you can do is draft the best prospects and coach them up.* To put Fleener in as a starter in your projections this upcoming season is a huge leap.* Rarely does a rookie TE contribute in the way you are suggesting.**




    Maybe you're right about his potential contribution but there is a bit of rationalization in this argument.* It assumes a lot and would represent "best case" scenario to me.




    Are there other TE's in the draft that could adddress the kinds of needs we have that can be taken in later rounds?* Probably.




    I have a feeling that someone is dropping to us.* Maybe Jonathon Martin, maybe the DE from USC, maybe Chandler Jones.* I mean Prince dropped in our lap last draft and I think he's going to be a great pro.




    But I do think we are best served with a player that can help us in the running game.




    [/quote] Hence why I said "potential". If you consider the draft order a probability in potential (which is all that it really is) Fleener gives us the most potential upside THIS YEAR. That's not to say he would be the best player in the draft, our team or work out at all. Just that he POTENTIALLY plugs the greatest amount of holes/question marks on our team. All in one player. A great RB that can catch, block and run behind our inconsistent blocking would also do that for us, I agree. So in our debate here, it comes down to who gives us the greatest probability for doing so; the #1 rated TE in the draft, or the #2 (or #3 if we're going with Wilson) rated RB in the draft? I'd be fine with saying flip a coin. I don't think either has a measurable difference ... not enough to say definitively (as opposed to say the differences between Hightower and Kuechly lets say) and I'd be happy with either. If we DID go RB in the first, I think Martin (in the short term at least) gives us more upside then Wilson. Martin seemed to do better behind shoddy blocking then Wilson did; although Wilson is the more prototypical back (and possibly better compliment to AB).[/quote]




    Those Boise guys don't do much better than Uconn guys in the NFL.

    [/quote]

    True ... but the same thing could be said of Morehead State and QBs until Simms. [b]
    I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

  9. #39
    All-Pro Morehead State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Westfield, MA
    Posts
    43,191

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    [quote user="slipknottin"][quote user="Morehead State"]


    Those Boise guys don't do much better than Uconn guys in the NFL.




    [/quote] I really dont understand what scouts have seen in the former Uconn players drafted. Ive gone to most Uconn games and the first player Ive seen that to me looks like a legitimate NFL player is Reyes.[/quote]




    I thought Andre Dixon had a chance to be a good pro. Shows what I know.

    "Phil Simms is the greatest QB in Giants history" ........Mahatma Gandhi

  10. #40
    All-Pro Morehead State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Westfield, MA
    Posts
    43,191

    Re: PFW Beat Writers Mock (4/24)

    [quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="Morehead State"]Bennett is extreemly athletic but there is no doubt that he has underperformed in the NFL. But he can block and should be a huge assett in the running game. Right now I'm more concerned with that aspect of our offense than any other. One of the reasons in my view that Eli took so much punishment last season, including the playoffs was our lack of a running attack. Just don't see how the addition of a pass catching rookie TE will help us in that.





    [/quote] The thing you're missing here is that Bennet won't freeze a Safety or LB because he isn't considered a receiving threat on play action / option plays. Bennet can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener can block but he's not an amazing blocker. Fleener also has the upside of being a very real threat in the passing game. If that pans out, that means one less person stuffing the box. One of the problems we had running the ball lately stems from not having a TE that can threaten down field (Ballard/Pascoe being mediocre at best and less than reliable down the stretch). Accordingly, our dynamic passing game relied on having a third stready outlet (be it MM as the #3 or our TE). We have effectively lost both due to free agency and injury for 2012. Fleener gives us the potential to partially solve our run-game, while at the same time gives us the highest probability of continuing our dynamic passing game as opposed to anyone else projected to be drafted at the #32 spot or that we currently have on our team. I'd call that a pretty big arguement for drafting him if he's available. More so than any other possible draftee. Hence the love affair.[/quote]




    First of all Fleener (or any other draftee at 32) is a college football player and a pro prospect. We don't know what he would do, or learn to do at the pro level.




    All you can do is draft the best prospects and coach them up. To put Fleener in as a starter in your projections this upcoming season is a huge leap. Rarely does a rookie TE contribute in the way you are suggesting.




    Maybe you're right about his potential contribution but there is a bit of rationalization in this argument. It assumes a lot and would represent "best case" scenario to me.




    Are there other TE's in the draft that could adddress the kinds of needs we have that can be taken in later rounds? Probably.




    I have a feeling that someone is dropping to us. Maybe Jonathon Martin, maybe the DE from USC, maybe Chandler Jones. I mean Prince dropped in our lap last draft and I think he's going to be a great pro.




    But I do think we are best served with a player that can help us in the running game.




    [/quote] Hence why I said "potential". If you consider the draft order a probability in potential (which is all that it really is) Fleener gives us the most potential upside THIS YEAR. That's not to say he would be the best player in the draft, our team or work out at all. Just that he POTENTIALLY plugs the greatest amount of holes/question marks on our team. All in one player. A great RB that can catch, block and run behind our inconsistent blocking would also do that for us, I agree. So in our debate here, it comes down to who gives us the greatest probability for doing so; the #1 rated TE in the draft, or the #2 (or #3 if we're going with Wilson) rated RB in the draft? I'd be fine with saying flip a coin. I don't think either has a measurable difference ... not enough to say definitively (as opposed to say the differences between Hightower and Kuechly lets say) and I'd be happy with either. If we DID go RB in the first, I think Martin (in the short term at least) gives us more upside then Wilson. Martin seemed to do better behind shoddy blocking then Wilson did; although Wilson is the more prototypical back (and possibly better compliment to AB).[/quote]




    Those Boise guys don't do much better than Uconn guys in the NFL.




    [/quote] True ... but the same thing could be said of Morehead State and QBs until Simms. [b][/quote]




    Every Morehead State QB ever drafted has been their NFL team's all time leading passer.




    Hahaha!!

    "Phil Simms is the greatest QB in Giants history" ........Mahatma Gandhi

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts